MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7110465595

2018 Provincial consultations on healthy aging

2019· other· en· W7110465595 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2019
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealthy agingAction (physics)Healthy ageingPublic healthPopulation ageingMEDLINE
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2018, the Coalition for Healthy Aging in Manitoba (CHAM) facilitated a series of workshops in various locations in Manitoba. Participants were asked to discuss what Manitoba is doing well and what could be improved with each of the following three strategic areas from the Global Strategy and Action Plan: age-friendly environments, health systems, and long-term care. This report summarizes the comments received across all sites for each of the strategic areas. In general, very similar items were discussed at all locations, even though the communities are quite different in their locations, sizes, demographics, cultural backgrounds, and histories.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.797
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0940.009

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→French-language works237,207→